Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

arnie_ni

Full Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
15,216
If you think that 3 of the richest self made businessmen in Britain are going give their money away for nothing in return, then you are being pretty naïve.

They know full well that the debt saddled on the club is crippling the ability to compete in the current market.

As we are all aware, United generate an income of £600m per season. But without a proper infrastructure, director of football, five year plan, we get our pants pulled down in the transfer market, make poor decisions with a long term impact on the finances, and on top of that we have had to make debt re-payments of £760m.

This was money that should have been re-invested back into the club.

This investment now has to come from outside, and for their money, they will get shares in the club and will undertake a major role in the running of the football side of the club. This is exactly what we need.

People are going to be sore and hurting by the Glazers still being the major shareholders, because they dangled that carrot for almost a year, and people chased after it. But the investment required to turn the club around is now there.

The 3 owners of Ineos are worth £43bn

Now they have a 25% stake in our club. This is better than what we had yesterday.

And lets say Sheikh Jasim was successful. And he paid off all of the Glazers. How much would he need to invest into the club to clear the debt and re-develop Old Trafford. About £1.8bn

How much money are Ineos investing into the club for a 25% stake?

£1.8bn

The result is the same.
Need twitters disinformation correction on this post.

They have bought 25 percent of the Glazers shares. That money belongs to the Glazers. Not United.

Look at SJ bid. He had a separate fund for investment into the club beyond what he offered the Glazers for their shares because that money doesn't go to the club.
 

C'est Moi Cantona

Full Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
8,810
If you know you are going to sell your house, will you do any major improvements? More like a slap dash of paint right?
Well not really, a full renovation and/or an extension could raise the value of your house by more than it costs, you just need the money to do it first.
 

MancunianAngels

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
2,509
Location
Manchester
Supports
FC United
Forgetting everything else for a second...

Can we just get some perspective please?

"Darkest day for the club since 1958" according to some people on Twitter. Our fans are bizarre.
 

edgecutter

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
4,643
If you think that 3 of the richest self made businessmen in Britain are going give their money away for nothing in return, then you are being pretty naïve.

They know full well that the debt saddled on the club is crippling the ability to compete in the current market.

As we are all aware, United generate an income of £600m per season. But without a proper infrastructure, director of football, five year plan, we get our pants pulled down in the transfer market, make poor decisions with a long term impact on the finances, and on top of that we have had to make debt re-payments of £760m.

This was money that should have been re-invested back into the club.

This investment now has to come from outside, and for their money, they will get shares in the club and will undertake a major role in the running of the football side of the club. This is exactly what we need.

People are going to be sore and hurting by the Glazers still being the major shareholders, because they dangled that carrot for almost a year, and people chased after it. But the investment required to turn the club around is now there.

The 3 owners of Ineos are worth £43bn

Now they have a 25% stake in our club. This is better than what we had yesterday.

And lets say Sheikh Jasim was successful. And he paid off all of the Glazers. How much would he need to invest into the club to clear the debt and re-develop Old Trafford. About £1.8bn

How much money are Ineos investing into the club for a 25% stake?

£1.8bn

The result is the same.
£1.8 billion isn't going to the club. The only place that money is going to is the shareholders pockets! The problems that are currently facing the football club will still be there
 

fallengt

Full Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
5,603
25% less Glazer is still a lot better than what it was yesterday. A full sale would have been preferable but anyone who thinks they'll take their stinky paws and head home with a handsome profit hasn't followed the Glazers for the past two decades.
No its not. They pumped the club value x2 from the sale rumor, sold minority of their now over priced stakes whilst making sure Joel & Avram still have most voting power.
They practically printed money out if thin air :lol:. Everyone had been dubbed
 

edgecutter

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
4,643
25% less Glazer is still a lot better than what it was yesterday. A full sale would have been preferable but anyone who thinks they'll take their stinky paws and head home with a handsome profit hasn't followed the Glazers for the past two decades.
He isn't buying 25% of the glazer's shares. He is buying around 12.5% and the other 12.5% from the other share holders to avoid legal battles. The glazers will still own over 50% of the club.
 

hellhunter

Eurofighter
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
18,056
Location
Stuttgart, Germany
Supports
Karlsruher SC
No its not. They pumped the club value x2 from the sale rumor, sold minority of their now over priced stakes whilst making sure Joel & Avram still have most voting power.
They practically printed money out if thin air :lol:. Everyone had been dubbed
You can hate them as much as you want, they really know how to make money
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,768
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
For me the main problem is that the Glazers remain. And that is toxic.

Ratcliffe supporters, and non-supporters to be fair, need to recognise that if this goes through, the Glazers are still going to be in charge for the foreseeable, are still going to hold the purse strings even if Ratcliffe has an influence over the football direction and most of all - Ratcliffe is going to be in a business relationship with the Glazers. That means he’s going to be singing their praises and saying how great they are to work with. I don’t think people fully appreciate just how toxic that is going to be with our supporters.


Then you have the ongoing issues with:
  • Debt - The debt will remain and it’s not going to be in either Glazer/Ratcliffe interest to clear this without being awarded capital for their further investment.
  • Infrastructure - this entire strategic review was supposedly to raise investment to pay for the Stadium and training ground improvements. Where is that money coming from now?
  • If this is ratified, how does it meet the goals of the strategic review in any way shape or form? If the money Ratcliffe plays is going out of the club to the Glazer pockets what benefit does that have to the club? Why did the club employ Raine to sell Glazer shares at a premium at the cost of other shareholders?
 

Castia

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
18,420
25% less Glazer is still a lot better than what it was yesterday. A full sale would have been preferable but anyone who thinks they'll take their stinky paws and head home with a handsome profit hasn't followed the Glazers for the past two decades.
You’re under the assumption that it can’t get worse than the Glazers. Strap yourself in.
 

DomesticTadpole

Doom-monger obsessed with Herrera & the M.E.N.
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
101,397
Location
Barrow In Furness
Are human rights abuses OK though because you seem to only speak about the bad actions of one party (ignoring the environmental damage done by INEOS which is much worse than the stupidity of Brexit) and then ignore the state bidding on the other hand.

Also nobody is celebrating INEOS and Ratcliffe taking over over time, the only thing I'm happy about is we're not becoming a state tool. It's only weirdos twerking for Qatar who have actively been supporting either bid, the reality is we're picking between different shades of awful billionaires and we're going to have the slightly less awful one in the coming years.
It was between a rock and a hard place. Neither is great. The biggest issue is the greedy Glazers. We don't know exactly what Racliffe is going to do. If it just ends up as a status quo then he will get the same flak as the Glazers as would Qatar. This is one hell of a job to take on. It isn't a small club trying to climb the league with gradual investment, this is a huge world famous club that needs major investment in all departments and needs dragging into the 21st century.
 

Drizzle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
1,350
Forgetting everything else for a second...

Can we just get some perspective please?

"Darkest day for the club since 1958" according to some people on Twitter. Our fans are bizarre.
The club is dead. We're finished. It's over. Worst day since 58. Etc etc.

Why do people talk in such extremes? It's emotions taking over reason. We don't even know what's going to happen yet.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
25% less Glazer is still a lot better than what it was yesterday. A full sale would have been preferable but anyone who thinks they'll take their stinky paws and head home with a handsome profit hasn't followed the Glazers for the past two decades.
I’m arguing against this notion that the fans are spoilt oil hungry weirdos.
The fanbase wants Glazers out, have done for years. This was a discussion about buying Glazers out up until about a week ago so nearly a full year of dangling it in front of fans faces. Coupled with the accepted reason why they wanted a sale / investment in that our debt is spiralling out of control and we can’t afford badly need infrastructure improvements. That simply won’t happen now when all Jim will get is to be the face of football decision making as they scramble to save face from fans wrath. This journo talking down to our fanbase while ignoring real concerns borders on insulting
The Glazers are constantly selling shares, I’ve read they’ve sold 600m odd worth of shares since their parasite father died. What does this change?
If there is no legal option for Jim to take control then it’s a disaster all round. It won’t stop posters telling us about gentlemen agreements or such nonsense to tell themselves this is a good deal. That needs to be in the bid or we are simply fecked.
Imagine it’s not and they sell to someone else other than Jim, that’s instant turmoil on its own
 

Esquire

Full Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
2,318
This. The copium from posters here that Jim is going to be our saviour is absurd. The only people that Jim has helped is the Glazers, and they were on their death bed before this happened as the club couldn't keep going with the level of debt placed on it.
I agree with you and the poster you responded to. Like any business deal, it’s perspective. Some people clearly see this as a start of something good and new. With the Glazers and their entire conduct since they owned this club day 1, I don’t see how this is the start of another chapter. Sir Jim is not an idiot but you can see getting in on 25% is not just about getting the club back, but getting in on the investment because they think United will keep gaining value. Fact is the PL and PL clubs will just getting richer and more valuable. Glazers just offloaded 25% of the club’s shares in exchange for a strategic investor who won’t rock the boat for 1.5b. What a fantastic deal for them. All this talk about financial costs and debt level is misleading b/c it is very clear that the club can shoulder that debt on the long run. What will be lost is what we have been seeing over the years, the neglect of the facilities, stadium etc. The Glazers clearly have a business model and a strategy to grow the book value of the club based on commercial deals and riding the upward trend of PL. Does selling Jim 25% change that model? Not one bit in my view.
 

2 man midfield

Last Man Standing finalist 2021/22
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
46,081
Location
?
Forgetting everything else for a second...

Can we just get some perspective please?

"Darkest day for the club since 1958" according to some people on Twitter. Our fans are bizarre.
This is why I asked if everyone knew something I didn’t, it’s all a bit over the top isn’t it?
 

arnie_ni

Full Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
15,216
There is simply no way that the shareholders who own 31% of the club would be happy that the Glazer's have their shares bought and not theirs.
So youve made that up?

Theres 2 different classes on shares. The class b voting shares aren't listed on the stock exchange. They are the ones being sold.

You could be right but I'm not sure you are. The Glazers are privately selling their voting shares here
 

Castia

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
18,420
The only way I’m on board with Jim is if he comes out and guarantees the club will be bought within 3 years and everything that needs doing like the stadium and debt will be serviced by INEOS. The chances of that are zilch so Jim can get fecked.
 

edgecutter

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
4,643
So youve made that up?

Theres 2 different classes on shares. The class b voting shares aren't listed on the stock exchange. They are the ones being sold.
I hope that is true, but that isn't going to happen. 31% of shares are not owned by the Glazer's, those shareholders will not be happy that the Glazer family will pocket 1.8 billion and they don't get a cut.
 

arnie_ni

Full Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
15,216
I hope that is true, but that isn't going to happen. 31% of shares are not owned by the Glazer's, those shareholders will not be happy that the Glazer family will pocket 1.8 billion and they don't get a cut.
31 percent of the publicly traded class A shares though. They have no power no voting rights. I could buy they today if I wanted at their publicly traded price.

The Glazers are selling their privately owned voting shares here. They'll still own the majority of them.
 

AneRu

Full Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
3,174
If you think that 3 of the richest self made businessmen in Britain are going give their money away for nothing in return, then you are being pretty naïve.

They know full well that the debt saddled on the club is crippling the ability to compete in the current market.

As we are all aware, United generate an income of £600m per season. But without a proper infrastructure, director of football, five year plan, we get our pants pulled down in the transfer market, make poor decisions with a long term impact on the finances, and on top of that we have had to make debt re-payments of £760m.

This was money that should have been re-invested back into the club.

This investment now has to come from outside, and for their money, they will get shares in the club and will undertake a major role in the running of the football side of the club. This is exactly what we need.

People are going to be sore and hurting by the Glazers still being the major shareholders, because they dangled that carrot for almost a year, and people chased after it. But the investment required to turn the club around is now there.

The 3 owners of Ineos are worth £43bn

Now they have a 25% stake in our club. This is better than what we had yesterday.

And lets say Sheikh Jasim was successful. And he paid off all of the Glazers. How much would he need to invest into the club to clear the debt and re-develop Old Trafford. About £1.8bn

How much money are Ineos investing into the club for a 25% stake?

£1.8bn

The result is the same.
I asked this question yesterday, who exactly is selling the stake to Sir Jim? Because if its the Glazers and minority shareholders on the NYSE then none of that 1.7b is coming our way, of that you can be certain. If its the club issuing fresh shares to Sir Jim then its possible that the new investment is coming into the club. That point needs to be clear.

The two push factors for the Glazers to conduct this strategic review was to seek funding so as to finance the stadium redevelopment and also because the other four want out. Clearly they haven't agreed on a way out of both and 1.8bn seems too little to achieve both ends and we all know which will be put on the back burner.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
120,173
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Mate, yes I would rather watch us get relegated. My dad watched us in the second division and he said some of them games were the best games he's ever been to. I want us to be the best club in the world like everyone else on here, but I don't want it gifted to us by some rich fecking sheikh. If we get back to the top I want us to earn it ourselves like we always have. If you and anyone else just wants handouts I'll say it again go and support City or PSG if you want that sort of club.
Unless someone else comes in and clears the debt we will never be able to “do it on our own”. If we get relegated it won’t be fun because that huge debt will take us under.
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,535
If you think that 3 of the richest self made businessmen in Britain are going give their money away for nothing in return, then you are being pretty naïve.

They know full well that the debt saddled on the club is crippling the ability to compete in the current market.

As we are all aware, United generate an income of £600m per season. But without a proper infrastructure, director of football, five year plan, we get our pants pulled down in the transfer market, make poor decisions with a long term impact on the finances, and on top of that we have had to make debt re-payments of £760m.

This was money that should have been re-invested back into the club.

This investment now has to come from outside, and for their money, they will get shares in the club and will undertake a major role in the running of the football side of the club. This is exactly what we need.

People are going to be sore and hurting by the Glazers still being the major shareholders, because they dangled that carrot for almost a year, and people chased after it. But the investment required to turn the club around is now there.

The 3 owners of Ineos are worth £43bn

Now they have a 25% stake in our club. This is better than what we had yesterday.

And lets say Sheikh Jasim was successful. And he paid off all of the Glazers. How much would he need to invest into the club to clear the debt and re-develop Old Trafford. About £1.8bn

How much money are Ineos investing into the club for a 25% stake?

£1.8bn

The result is the same.
They get 25% stake as a return
 

sixdwarf

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2022
Messages
971
I've been reading the forum for close to 10 years, which I really will never understand why United fans argue against each other. That is so weird. Why can't you get yourselves to unite for the one "thing". Almost every day people make fun of Goldbridge or someone else, guys you all want the same thing, for Man United to be successful again. I was at Old Trafford as recently as September - I was really shocked at the state the stadium is in. I sat in the Bobby Charlton Stand and got wet there because it rained that day. I think everyone who reads the forum here, I assume, should know what condition the club is in. I agree that the 25% of Sir James Arthur Ratcliffe FIChemE is not good for us, regardless we agree that the Glazers should finally sell the club. If I lived in Manchester I would protest every damn game day until the monkeys were gone. Why can't you guys get this right? I live in Hamburg and can't afford this, but any other big club would never get this through in their lifetime.
Protests will do little to absent landlords. Only action that hits the owners in the pocket might awaken them. Like a fill blown boycott.
 

Gavinb33

Full Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2014
Messages
2,776
Location
Watching the TV or is it watching me
Can’t wait to see the excuses when he takes out massive loans to buy more of the % in the coming years.

Even funnier people believe INEOS will service those loans.
I see these quotes and it makes me laugh, Manchester United have a turnover of what 700 million and yet would be expected to contribute some money to service a loan in the billions when they have struggled to pay a loan of 700 million over 15 years, anything United would contribute would be like firing a BB gun at a train and expecting it to stop it, these people are not stupid they know how to run businesses anyone would think they run a corner shop rather than one of the worlds biggest petrochemical companies by the way some people on here talk
 

arnie_ni

Full Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
15,216
I asked this question yesterday, who exactly is selling the stake to Sir Jim? Because if its the Glazers and minority shareholders on the NYSE then none of that 1.7b is coming our way, of that you can be certain. If its the club issuing fresh shares to Sir Jim then its possible that the new investment is coming into the club. That point needs to be clear.

The two push factors for the Glazers to conduct this strategic review was to seek funding so as to finance the stadium redevelopment and also because the other four want out. Clearly they haven't agreed on a way out of both and 1.8bn seems too little to achieve both ends and we all know which will be put on the back burner.
has it ever been rumoured this could be a issuance of new shares or is thay just wishful thinking. Everywhere states the glazers are selling 25 percent of their shares.
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,535
For me the main problem is that the Glazers remain. And that is toxic.

Ratcliffe supporters, and non-supporters to be fair, need to recognise that if this goes through, the Glazers are still going to be in charge for the foreseeable, are still going to hold the purse strings even if Ratcliffe has an influence over the football direction and most of all - Ratcliffe is going to be in a business relationship with the Glazers. That means he’s going to be singing their praises and saying how great they are to work with. I don’t think people fully appreciate just how toxic that is going to be with our supporters.


Then you have the ongoing issues with:
  • Debt - The debt will remain and it’s not going to be in either Glazer/Ratcliffe interest to clear this without being awarded capital for their further investment.
  • Infrastructure - this entire strategic review was supposedly to raise investment to pay for the Stadium and training ground improvements. Where is that money coming from now?
  • If this is ratified, how does it meet the goals of the strategic review in any way shape or form? If the money Ratcliffe plays is going out of the club to the Glazer pockets what benefit does that have to the club? Why did the club employ Raine to sell Glazer shares at a premium at the cost of other shareholders?
Good summary
 
Status
Not open for further replies.